According to Stoner and McFaul when the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) was defeated and voted out of office in 2000 this turnout allowed for a completion of a successful transition to democracy in Mexico (264). Although a transition did occur and Mexico does have solid democratic foundations, bewildering corruption, poor rule of law, and narco related violence have halted Mexican democratic consolidation.
The current state of Mexican democracy is seemingly difficult to analyze because Mexico is still a relatively new democracy. The Mexican government has come a long way and still has a lot to work on order to improve its democracy. The Mexican government has been successful at upholding substantive and procedural methods of government yet it has been failing in participation and responsiveness. The current government allows elections and reforms to be implemented when civil society has called for them, but civil society, although becoming more active,has not been able to keep the privileged elite political class accountable (Nytimes 1). The electoral reform laws that took place in 1994-1996 allowed for better transparency and fairness while voting (Stoner and Mcfaul 263). These laws as well as the devaluation of the peso had voters turn against the PRI which inevitably let voters to form a new party (Stoner and Mcfaul 262). The success of a new party in 2000 allowed for a democratic transition but the inertia has been lost and democratic consolidation isn’t possible unless certain problems are addressed.
The PRI party that had run Mexico for 71 years by using an unfair system of corruption was defeated, but the remnants they left behind are creating more challenges for democratic consolidation. In 2000, af...
... middle of paper ...
...e to be brought under control and civil society were to be more engaged in establishing a rule of law, democratic consolidation could take effect in Mexican governance in the long term.
Works Cited
Emmerich, Gustavo E. "The State of Democracy in Mexico." Idea.int. Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2014.
Gonzalez, Francisco. Countries at the Crossroads. Freedom House, 2013. Web. 10 Jan. 2014.
"Mexico Drug War Deaths over Five Years Now Total 47,515." BBC News. BBC, 01 Dec. 2012. Web. 9 Jan. 2014.
"Mexican Democracy’s Lost Years." New York Times, 23 June 2012. Web. 9 Jan. 2014.
O'Neill, Shannon K. "Mexico: Development and Democracy at a Crossroads." A Markets and Democracy Brief. Council on Foreign Relations, Feb. 2011. Web. 9 Jan. 2014.
"Mexico." Countries at the Crossroads. Freedom House, n.d. Web. 9 Jan. 2014.
Mexican Lives is a rare piece of literature that accounts for the human struggle of an underdeveloped nation, which is kept impoverished in order to create wealth for that of another nation, the United States. The reader is shown that the act of globalization and inclusion in the world’s economies, more directly the United States, is not always beneficial to all parties involved. The data and interviews, which Hellman has put forth for her readers, contain some aspect of negativity that has impacted their lives by their nation’s choice to intertwine their economy with that of the United States. Therefore it can only be concluded that the entering into world markets, that of Mexico into the United States, does not always bring on positive outcomes. Thus, one sees that Mexico has become this wasteland of economic excrement; as a result it has become inherently reliant on the United States.
Diaz offered foreign investors to start business in Mexico and encouraged utilization of the country’s natural resources through the investment of foreign capital (284).
The Porfirio Diaz first had good intentions for Mexico. He at first bettered Mexico exponentially in his first few years. His main goal for the government was to be more industrial. He thought that agriculture didn’t matter as much as industry. The only problem was that most of the people living in Mexico depended on the agriculture. Diaz was well aware of the problem and ignored the people’s needs. Eventually his popularity started to drop. People where then looking for anyway to take him out of office. Once he realized that his presidency was being threatened; he did everything in his power to ensure he won. That is; until “People started noticing that he was rigging elections” (Source b2).
The United States has no more important foreign relation ship than that of which it enjoys with Mexico, and vice versa. These two countries share interwoven societies and economies. Although there have been disagreements and turbulence between the two countries, which partnership is without these? The Strength of each country’s democracy is fundamental to the other’s. This relationship that the two countries share directly affects that lives of millions of Mexican and United States citizens everyday. Recently these two countries have become even more unified than ever before. Tackling issues such as Border Control, Countering Narcotics, Dealing with multiple Law enforcement agencies, Human Rights laws, trade and development, etc. There are many issues that they are mutually interested in and must deal with. Yet, there are some vast differences in which these two countries are run. There are also many similarities, which we must take into account. Both Democratic Governments have similar structures, containing a legislative, judicial, and executive branch. Yet, these structures are very different internally, containing specific duties that the other country’s branch may not have.
For thirty-four years Mexico existed under the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz. During this time Mexico’s industries flourished however the Mexican people remained deep in poverty with little to no opportunities for educational growth. The Mexican revolution was the result of Diaz’s fall from leadership, the peons need for independence, and resulted in a new beginning for Mexico. The Mexican Revolution began due to Porfirio Diaz not allowing anyone to have a voice or say in whatever it is they must do. The people of Mexico were upset because everyone was in poverty because only a select few people actually had money because Porfirio Diaz allowed them to those select few where also the ones in power behind Porfirio. Due to all of the poverty and the poor not having a say in anything they do or have to do it caused an uprising of the peasants led by Emeliano Zapata and Pancho Villa which are greatly known for their effort against the corruption and poverty in Mexico. Although Porfirio Diaz had brought some great things to help Mexico flourish in the industrial form and economical form but for the normal working class citizens that aren’t good friends with Diaz or know him on a personal level are left broke and are left with no way to get away from their financial problems because Diaz doesn’t allow them to make enough money to prosper in anything they do. Diaz’s way of ruling Mexico was so bad that it didn’t even allow the majority of the people of Mexico to get an education because they couldn’t afford it. The only people to benefit from the new rail road systems and factories were the rich hacienda land owners. The rich hacienda owners were also the people who were basically in control over the peons they had control over them as ...
Nevertheless, the movie undoubtedly mirrors many of the current socio-political time in which the film was made. The title itself refers to a famous quotation from the Nobel Prize-winning author Mario Vargas Llosa, who once referred to Mexico's ruling party, the PRI, as a "camouflaged dictatorship," thereby making it "the perfect dictatorship." In this way, the movie is directly acknowledging its relevance to modern Mexico and its politics and is clearly very self-aware. The plot itself was based on the real life perceived Televisa controversy during the 2012 Mexican presidential election, in which Mexican citizens believe that the media was unfairly showing a preference for the PRI candidate, Enrique Peña Nieto. While it could be argued that the movie takes this idea of favoring one candidate over another to extreme lengths (although perhaps it isn’t showing anything unduly unrealistic – there’s no real way to know) and hyperbolizes the effect of the media in Mexican politics, there is clearly a strong element of truth and reality there. The movie would not have had nearly the same effect if it was not at least somewhat grounded in reality. And I think that, while the media does not have absolute and final control over politics, they do to a very large and important extent and this extends far beyond the movie alone, especially in today’s age of fake
Mexico declared its independence from Spain in Sept, 16, 1810, and for the next 100 years what followed was a period of political instability of rule under monarchies, federal republics and dictatorships. Finally in 1910, a revolt on the autocracy under Porfirio Diaz led to the start of the M...
The history of political instability in Mexico and its need for revolution is very complex and dates back to the colonization of Mexico by the Spaniards in the 1500s. However, many aspects of the social situation of Mexico when the Revolution broke out can be attributed to the thirty-year dictatorship of President Porfrio Diaz, prior to 1911. The Revolution began in November of 1910 in an effort to overthrow the Diaz dictatorship. Under the Diaz presidency, a small minority of people, primarily relatives and friends, were in ...
Harry E. Canden. , & Gary Prevost, (2012). Politics Latin America. (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Peeler, John A. Latin American Democracies. Chapel Hill, NC and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1985. Print.
There was a huge revolution in the country of Mexico that started in the year 1910, led by Porfirio Diaz, the president of Mexico in 1910. In the 1860’s Diaz was important to Mexican politics and then was elected president in 1877. Diaz said that he would only be president for one year and then would resign, but after four years he was re-elected as the President of Mexico. Porfirio Diaz and the Mexican revolution had a huge impact on the country of Mexico that is still felt in some places today.
When we hear discussions or read articles about drug wars, killings, and illegal immigration into the United States, many of us immediately think of Mexico. As a nation, Mexico is a much greater country than these commonly referred to issues. Mexico is a country with a broad history, deep family culture, and an economy fueled by oil and tourism. The United States Department of State (USDS) offers a broad range of information on countries outside the US, including Mexico. I found a wealth of information about Mexico through the USDS Background Note provided on their website located at www.state.gov. I will outline for you the key information found in this report, and others, related to the Mexican economy, culture, and more.
The Mexican Revolution. N.p., n.d. Web. The Web. The Web. 09 Nov. 2013.
“The Perilous State of Mexico.” The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 21 Feb. 2009. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.
Wiarda H. J. and Skelley E. M., 2005, Dilemmas of Democracy in Latin America: Crises and Opportunity, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc